[Ray9]

I can only say what I remember about Reagan's time. He motivated people to question the notion that government was the answer to our economic problems and consider that government was our economic problem. His firing of the air traffic controllers cemented his popularity with both Republicans and Democrats who were fed up with Carter-inspired appeasement policies and were yearning for decisive leadership. He had a plan to defeat the Soviets by bankrupting them at a time when they were struggling to maintain order in a hungry, disenchanted population. His Stragic Defense Initiative, SDI or Star Wars, was the final nail in the coffin for the Soviets though he also cleverly cost them huge amounts of money in Afganistan by supplying the Mujahideen, with stinger missles causing havoc with helicopters especially. He was able to limit the flow of western technology to the Soviet Union and was instrumintal in reducing the flow of Soviet natural gas exports to western Europe. Reagan's policies aided in a drastic fall in the price of oil in the 1980's which weakened the Russian economy by denying them significant inflows of hard currency. Instead of appeasement idiology, Reagan labled the Soviet Union "The Evil Empire" and vowed to take them down. The Russians had no stomache and no money to continue the cold war realizing Reagan meant business so they essentially threw in the towel. This is what I remember.

Had the Commusnists been up against the pantywaisted, appeasment policies of Jimmy Carter in those days they would still be in business today prosecuting the cold war. Reagan had a full set of balls which is not common in our time.

[stasis]

	Originally Posted by Ray9 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	they would still be in business today prosecuting the cold war.

We'd probably have a moon base by now had that been the case. Maybe even a manned Mars mission and all the socio-technological boons attendant, instead of a few rinky dink orbital platforms and a retired fleet of sky pandas.

[Ray9]

	Originally Posted by stasis To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	We'd probably have a moon base by now had that been the case. Maybe even a manned Mars mission and all the socio-technological boons attendant, instead of a few rinky dink orbital platforms and a retired fleet of sky pandas.

True, but you can also look at it this way: Reagan bluffed the bastards and they folded.

[stasis]

I think I'd have preferred him to wait until the pot had been sweetened by a moon base.

[eternaltriangle]

To those who assert the Reagan victory hypothesis (ie. that the Reagan military buildup - which started under Jimmy Carter - forced the Soviets into an arms race they couldn't win), consider the facts.

First, the Reagan buildup was actually fairly small - barely noticeable against historical trends.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Second, the buildup continued until the mid-80s. At no point, however, did the Soviets reduce hostility - despite two golden opportunities (the death of Brehznhev and then the death of Andropov), a broken economy, and a war in Afghanistan that continually sapped their strength.

Then Reagan dramatically reversed his posture toward the Soviet Union in early 1984. With Schultz now secretary of state, Reagan engaged in quiet diplomacy over small issues (like pentecostals in Moscow). And the buildup slowed and then reversed. So it was against the backdrop of a more peaceful Reagan (not to mention pressing domestic needs) that the Soviets went with the reformer Gorbachev, who worked with Reagan to end the Cold War.

What I am saying is that you can make an argument that Reagan ended the Cold War - and indeed, the fact that he was a rather simple man helped diplomatically. When he made a promise the Soviets believed him. However, that argument relies on Reagan being a better peacenik than Jimmy Carter could ever dream of.

[stealthfighter]

	Originally Posted by Ray9 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Had the Commusnists been up against the pantywaisted, appeasment policies of Jimmy Carter in those days they would still be in business today prosecuting the cold war. Reagan had a full set of balls which is not common in our time.

I wouldn't exactly attribute the decline of communism to Reagan's presidency but more on the fact that Soviet economics has proven itself ineffective during that decade. Since most communist countries in the world during that time relied on the USSR as their primary business partner, an economically weak USSR would mean economic catasprophe for these countries unless they adapt a new system which they did. Reagan just happened to be assertive enough in the face of a decaying opponent. Also, the Reaganomics did pumped up America's economy during the next few years but it came at the price of turning it into a credit-dependent system which is primarily the reason why current fiscal problems are tied up to excessive debts.

[Blunderbus]

Because he's dead and they need someone to rally around to stoke the party's fire. He grew the deficit, busted unions, reduced government oversight where it was actually needed and let unproductive finance sector take over the country while giving them tax breaks besides. The big $$$ bosses LOOOVE Reagan and they're seeing to it that YOU will, TOO!

[Ray9]

	Originally Posted by Blunderbus To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Because he's dead and they need someone to rally around to stoke the party's fire. He grew the deficit, busted unions, reduced government oversight where it was actually needed and let unproductive finance sector take over the country while giving them tax breaks besides. The big $$$ bosses LOOOVE Reagan and they're seeing to it that YOU will, TOO!

When Reagan took over people were dropping their house keys in their mailboxes and walking away from their homes because they could no longer afford the 14 percent interest rates and runaway inflation while they were unemployed. This was Jimmy Carter's legacy. Reagan was the only antidote for this poison and it saved the economy.

[Blunderbus]

	Originally Posted by Ray9 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	When Reagan took over people were dropping their house keys in their mailboxes and walking away from their homes because they could no longer afford the 14 percent interest rates and runaway inflation while they were unemployed. This was Jimmy Carter's legacy. Reagan was the only antidote for this poison and it saved the economy.

You are wrong.

I can't stand this "blame Carter" ignorance.... Carter was a good-hearted simpleton (elected because the country sought respite from Nixon) who suffered the blow-back from policies he had nothing to do with... Granted he didn't excel, but you are getting your history mixed up.

Inflation under Carter was due to Johnson's "gun and butter" programs and Nixon taking the country off the gold standard to PAY for Vietnam and the social programs.

Please look up Paul Volcker on Wikipedia who was appointed by Carter to Chairman of the Fed reserve in 1979. "Volcker's Fed is widely credited with ending the United States' stagflation crisis of the 1970s. Inflation, which peaked at 13.5% in 1981, was successfully lowered to 3.2% by 1983. Volcker raised the federal funds rate, which had averaged 11.2% in 1979, to a peak of 20% in June 1981. The prime rate rose to 21.5% in 1981 as well."

The high rates which ruined housing occurred under Reagan. Inflation also peaked under Reagan. The key point is that Carter appointed the man who fixed inflation by raising rates. Volcker cleansed the system of inflation by making money harder to get, which negatively impacted housing. Volcker is credited as being one of the greatest Fed Chairmen in US History because he did what was healthy for the country (regardless of the vicious press and political pressure) instead of just giving in to what everyone wanted at the time. Far cry from our last two Fed Chairmen who are more like drug dealers than doctors.

In summary: Carter was a one-term due to inflation caused by the military-industrial complex boondoggle that was Vietnam and the social spending (bribery) of previous Presidents which he had nothing to do with. The hostage issue just iced his cake. Ironically, Reagen got credit for fixing the economy ---- when it was Carter's appointment who was responsible.

You know not what you speak.